ReviewJugan geon-gang gwa jilbyeong2025
[Analysis of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Prediction Studies in the Republic of Korea].
Review in Jugan geon-gang gwa jilbyeong, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: During the initial outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), numerous predictive studies were conducted amid high uncertainty regarding the characteristics of the virus, and the study results were considered in the policymaking process. Methods: This study systematically analyzed research papers that predicted the spread of COVID-19 in the Republic of Korea. Focusing on 138 studies published between 2020 and October 15, 2024, it examined the data and methodologies employed and explored ways to enhance the utility of predictive outcomes in managing infectious disease outbreaks. Results: These methodologies included mathematical models, statistical models, and machine learning-based approaches to predict COVID-19 spread patterns. Beyond forecasting future outbreak trends, these predictive models were also instrumental in evaluating existing measures and proposing effective policies through scenario-based assumptions. Conclusions: This study's findings highlight the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration in developing predictive models to effectively prepare for and respond to infectious diseases. By doing so, it aims to minimize the public health impacts of infectious diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.